3 ms·
It is anything but. It's like saying "gasoline is emissions free, it's the burning of it that's the problem." If we're going to have a rational discussion abou
by lutorm 12y ago
It is anything but. It's like saying "gasoline is emissions free, it's the burning of it that's the problem."
If we're going to have a rational discussion about various forms of emission, we need to talk about total fuel cycle emissions, otherwise it's meaningless. Touting one small section of a fuel cycle as emissions free is at best confusing, at worst misleading.
- epistasis 12y agoYou're still being incredibly dishonest, and if you're willing to talk like that, you should really worry about how much it hurts your personal credibility. With gasoline, the use of stored energy requires emissions. With batteries, the use of stored energy does not require emissions. You are creating false equivalencies, the only purpose of which is to drag down the discussion and stop the discussion. You want to talk about fuel cycle, talk about the fuel cycle, don't say things that are blatantly false.
- lutorm 12y agoTone down the hyperbole a bit there. With gasoline, the use of stored energy requires emissions. With batteries, the production of stored energy required emissions. True, the analogy isn't perfect, because maybe the batteries were charged from a PV system (though in practice chances are they were not) but to call it "incredibly dishonest" and "blatantly false" seems a bit excessive, don't you think? The point is, while using power from a battery doesn't cause any emissions, you need to know where the energy came from to make any meaningful comparisons.
- yongjik 12y agoYour statement would make sense if somewhere there is a vast reserve of charged batteries buried deep underground which we are mining, transporting, and putting on each car.